|[ ASCILITE ]
[ 2004 Proceedings Contents ] |
Increasingly the perceived benefits of information stored in a digital format are being exploited. The sophistication and ease of supporting web browsers, the creation of internet search engines and the advancing computer skills of students' mean, educational institutions at all levels are using the Internet and Intranets to supplement classroom instruction, to give learners the ability to connect to information (instructional and other resources) and to deliver learning experiences. This paper will focus on the concepts and procedures used in the development of an online learning environment perceptual measure, the Online Learning Environment Survey (OLLES). It is envisaged this instrument will inform educationalists of the effectiveness of tactics and strategies they are employing in e-environments.
However, the range of definitions of 'online learning' is not only a reflection of technological advances, it is also a reflection of the variety of ways educationalists, at all levels, use connected computers in learning. For example, in one situation a group of 14 year old students, following a pre-prepared unit in a supervised computer laboratory, may use the information storage capacity of the WWW to gather additional resources in preparing a presentation on the Antarctica. A second group of 16 year olds, studying the same topic in a classroom with a dedicated computer work station situated by the teacher's desk, could use the communicative functions of the Internet to establish mail lists with Antarctic staff to follow studies being undertaken on weather patterns. A third group of 12 year olds, consisting of small pockets of learners in isolated locations using home based connected workstations, may use an educational courseware package, incorporating information storage and communicative functions, to participate in a complete distance unit studying animal life in the Antarctic. Each of the groups described have used connected computers in different ways to achieve different objectives. The technical competencies required, the learning support needed and the physical location of the students in each case appears to be different and distinct. Initially it appears to be impossible to investigate each scenario using a common instrument, there does not appear to be any 'commonality'. On closer examination we find this is not the case.
|Computer Competence||Extent to which the student feels comfortable and enjoys using computers in the online environment.||I have no problems using a range of computer technologies.|
|Material Environment||Extent to which the computer hardware and software are adequate and user friendly.||The instructions provided to use the tools within the site are clear and precise.|
|Student Collaboration||Extent to which students work together, know, help, support and are friendly to each other.||I communicate regularly with other students in this course.|
|Tutor Support||The extent to which the tutor guides students in their learning and provides sensitive, ongoing and encouraging support.||The feedback I receive from my tutor helps me identify the things I do not understand.|
|Active Learning||The extent to which the computer activities support students in their learning and provide ongoing and relevant feedback.||The feedback I receive from activities / quizzes is meaningful.|
|Order and Organisation||Extent to which class activities are well organised and assist student comprehension.||The learning objectives are clearly stated for each topic.|
|Information Design and Appeal||Extent to which class materials are clear, stimulating and visually pleasing to the student.||The material presented is visually appealing.|
|Reflective Thinking||Extent to which reflective activities are encouraged and how students enjoyed learning and participating in this environment.||I am satisfied with my experience of using the Internet and learning online.|
|Order and Organisation||9||0.90|
|Information Design and Appeal||7||0.89|
The alpha for the scales, Order and Organisation and Active Learning (both above 0.9) could be considered to be excellent. The alpha for the scales Information Design and Appeal, Reflective Thinking, Tutor Support, Student Collaboration and Computer Competence (all above 0.8) could be considered to be good. The remaining scale, Material Environment (alpha above 0.7) could be considered acceptable. While high internal reliability does not necessarily mean there is an assurance of high quality, the results obtained are encouraging for further development. Further analysis of the scales and items will be undertaken and the refined version of the instrument will distributed to a wider audience.
Chin, K. L. & Ng Kon, P. (2003). Key factors for a fully online e-learning mode: a Delphi study. In G.Crisp, D.Thiele, I.Scholten, S.Barker & J.Baron (Eds.), Interact, Integrate, Impact: Proceedings of the 20th ASCILITE Conference. (pp.589-593): Adelaide, 7-10 December 2003. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/adelaide03/docs/pdf/589.pdf
Clayton, J. (2003). Assessing and researching the online learning environment. In M. S. Khine & D. Fisher (Eds.), Technology-rich learning environments: A future perspective. (pp. 127-137). Singapore: World Scientific.
Dorman, J., Fraser, B. & McRobbie, C. J. (1994). Rhetoric and Reality: A study of classroom environments in catholic and government secondary schools. In D. Fisher (Ed.), The Study of Learning Environments (Vol. 8, pp. 124-141). Perth: Curtin University of Technology.
Fraser, B. (1998). Science learning environments: Assessment, effects and determinants. In B. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 527-564). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Fraser, B. & Wubbels, T. (1995). Classroom learning environments. In B. Fraser & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Improving science education. (pp. 117-143). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Haynes, D. (2002). The social dimensions of online learning: Perceptions, theories and practical responses. Paper presented at the Distance Education Association of New Zealand, Wellington, 10-12 April.
Maor, D. (1999). Teacher and student reflections on interactions in an Internet based unit. In K. Martin, N. Stanley & N. Davison (Eds.), Teaching in the Disciplines/ Learning in Context, 257-261. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, The University of Western Australia, February 1999. Perth: UWA. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf1999/maor.html
Newhouse, P. (2001). Development and use of an instrument for computer-supported learning environments. Learning Environments Research: An International Journal, 2(2), 115-138.
Ommundsen, Y. (2001). Students' implicit theories of ability in physical education classes: The influence of motivational aspects of the learning environment. Learning Environments Research: An International Journal, 4(2), 139-158.
Taylor, P., & Maor, D. (2000). Assessing the efficacy of online teaching with the Constructivist On-Line Learning Environment Survey. In A. Herrmann & M. M. Kulski (Eds.), Flexible Futures in Tertiary Teaching. Proceedings of the 9th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 2-4 February 2000. Perth: Curtin University of Technology. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2000/taylor.html
Walker, S. (2003). Development and validation of an instrument for assessing distance education learning environments in higher education: The Distance Education Learning Environments Survey (DELES). Unpublished Doctor of Science Education Thesis, Curtin University of Technology, Perth.
Zhu, E., & McKnight, R. (2001). Principles of online design. Florida Gulf Coast University, Office of Instructional Technology [viewed 15 Mar 2003, verified 22 Nov 2004] http://www.fgcu.edu/onlinedesign/
|Author: John Clayton can be contacted at email@example.com (Hamilton, New Zealand)
Please cite as: Clayton, J. (2004). Investigating online learning environments. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 197-200). Perth, 5-8 December. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/clayton.html
© 2004 John Clayton
The author assigns to ASCILITE and educational non-profit institutions a non-exclusive licence to use this document for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The author also grants a non-exclusive licence to ASCILITE to publish this document on the ASCILITE web site (including any mirror or archival sites that may be developed) and in printed form within the ASCILITE 2004 Conference Proceedings. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the author.